Palin, Evangelical Religion and Enlightened Religion

Fr. Anderson, thank you for your essay.

In the interest of time, what has been overlooked in the divisive culture wars is the role of the Episcopal Church, specifically its decision to lobby publicly for abortion-on-demand, rather than to restrict its resolutions for pastoral guidance. This was made vividly clear when former Presiding Bishop Browning signed an Interfaith Letter - drafted by the Religious Coaliltion for Reproductive Choice - urging the members of Congress not to overturn President Clinton's veto of the proposed ban of the partial-birth abortion procedure. According to the Living Church magazine ("Calling for Civility, 2/16/97), the Presiding Bishop felt compelled to do so because of the consistent position of General Convention regarding legalized abortion.

Coincidentally, on the same date as the letter - April 29, 1996 -Bishop Spong appeared before a House Subcommittee and made a forceful appeal for legalizing "assisted suicide, " which was broadcast on C-SPAN. Following his testimony, the Chairman pointed out that the General Convention had passed a resolution rejecting "assisted suicide."

Over the 12 years since April 29, 1996, I am not aware of any serious effort on the part of the institutional church to bring these events to the attention of parishioners for their reflection, and this despite what Presiding Bishop Schori describes as the "highly democratic polity" which governs the modern church. Yet, in early 2006 the Executive Council formally affirmed the Church's membership in the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, and efforts to rescind that affiliation failed at the last General Convention.

As for Bishop Spong, he has enjoyed prophetic privilege over the years, and I believe the Episcopal Church would be hard-pressed to distance itself from his public advocacy.

Whatever may be said about Governor Palin, Karl Rove or anti-intellectualism, the events of April 29, 1996 are hard-copy and part of the modern Church’s identity. Given the role of National Cathedral as the “church for the nation.” does not the Episcopal Church have a moral obligation to make them public during this critical election season?

1st, a response to Rev. Peine~
Though the circulated list of banned books was a hoax (having already read the archived Anchorage Daily News, I deleted the email as a smear) the question put to the librarian by Palin was in fact "Would you be willing to remove books, if asked?" Now one can infer anything they'd like to suit their agenda but the most reasonable conclusion to draw is that Sarah Palin "considered" censoring certain books. The challenge to this librarian proved to be bigger than Palin had anticipated and so she dropped the matter. I encourage you to read the article as your criticism of Rev. Anderson was harsh and unfounded.

To both Peine and Anderson--
My husband and I had heard Palins Iraq comments days before they were picked up by the MSM. We both remarked that she appeared to question the administration and challenged the graduates to always listen for God's Will. As non-Palin supporters, we had to give her some humility points there.

Now-
My concern this morning--after hearing about Todd Palin's involvement in the governor's decisions-- goes back to the issue of women in leadership. I suspect the Wasilla Bible Church (like most Bible churches) subscribes to a "Complementarian" view of women; and my suspicion was further supported by their website staff pictures which lists men in the leadership ministries and the women listed last, all in ancillary roles having to do with children ministry etc. (If someone KNOWS this to be different, I'd appreciate a correction)

I've heard the theological gymnastics required to separate church from state and thereby okay women in government roles and I find it interesting that only the most conservative and most liberal evangelicals are willing to point out this strained logic. But Todd Palin's involvement (see NYT 9/13) and Sarah Palin's willingness (even effort) to involve her husband is a scary thought when it comes to the Vice Presidency (and possibly the Presidency). Candidates often fend-off press coverage of their spouses by saying they aren't the ones running for office. Can we say with any certainty that Todd Palin won't be involved in our nation's most intimate affairs? And regarding a complementarian view that allows for secular female leadership--does the husband have ultimate authority in this secular realm as well?

Oh and simply repeating rumors and lies about book banning do not befit someone who claims intellectual superiority over one's opposition. And lest you think I am anti-intellectual, I stand by the Wesleyan principles of judging any stance on Scripture, Tradition, REASON, and Experience--the Wesleyan way of viewing the world.

Dear Rev Anderson,

You should check your facts and listen carefully to what Sarah Palin said before bashing her. She said that her prayer was that this (the Iraq War)was God's will not that she thought it was God's will. She also said that she didn't presume to know God's will.

I am a retired Air Force Chaplain, who served in a Saudi Arabia but who didn't believe that we should have gone to war in Iraq. But that is a different issue then answering questions about what we should do now that we are there. You will assume that I am an evangelical (in the worst sense of the term) but you would be wrong. I am a United Methodist pastor and hold orthodox views of faith and liberal views of social justice issues.

Hello F.A.G.I.T.S: please Answer, a simple Yea or Nay?? not between!

From: Get Back , Get back From wence ye once belonged, Jo Jo!:

V O T E:

Answer Pleazea!

MARRiAGE is sacred , between a real Mavorite (Mr) & a Real Sporade (Ms), never between Mr & Mr..!

Yes or No?????????????????????????????? Yea or Nay????????????? DA or Nyet????

Ms. Lewis,

Thank you for the excellent post. It seems to be coming increasingly rare to see opinions expressed with kind language. Your post really gave me some things to consider in how the world views Christianity.

I'm an evangelical who is fortunate enough to have some friends with truly great minds. Here is what I have learned in the two areas you mention.

I see Creationism as teaching a literal, 7 day model of the origins of the earth. Intelligent Design, I believe, on the other hand simply teaches that an intelligent force created the primordial soup which brought about life. Something caused the mix of elements and energy which made the first amino acids. It not only stands on the study of biology, paleontology and other forms of science, but also statistics as we measure what are the actual odds of the perfect conditions existing to create life. (As well as the fact that these conditions, so far, cannot be replicated.) So as you can imagine there is plenty of room for us to debate and confusion within the evangelical community between these two points of view. Internal debate can only be magnified when placed in the public square.

As for your second point, calling for rational voices from within the evangelical community, well now the real irony begins. In my experience, the best pastors, elders and congregants I have met in the 6 years I have been a Christian are men and women who focus on personal relationships where they serve, and encourage others in their community. They focus on seeking humility rather than a microphone. Also, many evangelicals believe in individual congregations holding theological authority rather than a large denominational structure. So this leads to a great deal of both intra- and inter-congregational debate. (There is an old joke: Where ever you find three Baptists together, there will be seven opinions.) While this is good in that it is a biblical model of the church, it means we rarely speak with one voice. There are a few balanced, considerate voices heard outside of evangelical community, but all too often it is only the loud voices which gain any notice.

Nebdrek

I have striven hard for the last 35 years to keep the 10 commandments and other teachings in the Bible (get baptized, love thy neighbor, serve God, love my wife, bridle my tongue, etc.) Also, I change my ways and repent when I error.

Rev. Anderson, the thought that Karl Rove may be pulling the strings behind the scenes in order to cynically energize disaffected evangelicals to support the neo-conservative agenda is something that concerns me as well. I would like to see more evidence of this. If I were sufficiently convinced of it, I would not vote for Sen. McCain in November. As it is, I'm sitting on the fence, even though I consider that the sanctity of human life and the sanctity of marriage may be at stake in this election. The record of the past eight years is deeply disturbing by almost any measure.

That said, I'm not exactly favorably impressed by the moral purity or intellectual honesty of folks on the left, either. Neither party has a monopoly on cynicism and neither party is free of it's deadly influence. Whether we're talking about the neo-conservatives in the Republican Party or the secular humanists in the Democratic Party, in my opinion we're talking about highly anti-democratic forces bent on establishing a radical agenda.

As for your principal points: (1) Do you believe Gov. Palin's theological background or views are more naive than those of the average person of her age and intelligence? (2) Do you believe that Gov. Palin has sold her soul to the neo-cons in order to become the next Vice President? (3) Do you believe Gov. Palin attempted to coerce either the adoption of a creationist agenda or the censorship of library contents? Reports from CNN indicate that the New York Times piece on the latter claim was not justified by the facts.

I have reviewed your resume Mr. Anderson.

The kite flies high, the string occasionally glistening in the sunshine.

These polarities have at times seemed mutually exclusive, incapable of melding. In the last several years evangelical leaders such as Rick Warren and Jim Wallis have attempted to bridge this chasm with some real success. They ask their followers to examine the world and to think, learn, analyze what is happening and what is being learned. Leaders can encourage people to think and reason, instead of whipping them into frenzy by throwing the crowds the proverbial "red meat." Evangelical historian, Mark Noll, wrote a book called, "The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind." He stated that creation science is damaging serious Christian thinking "by undermining the ability" to examine the world and by replacing critical thought with unreflective religious ideology. We know that Sarah Palin made efforts to ban books in her local library. One might call this an excellent example of unreflective religious ideology pushing critical thought aside.

Thank you for answering a burning question I have about how a belief in Intelligent Design/Creationism is anti-intellectual. I stand outside of Christianity (I'm Jewish) and am very perplexed by the internal arguments raging in public through the work of politicians and political operatives as well as candidates and get very concerned for how such battles will affect the real work these people have to do, namely create appropriate policy on education, health care, defense, and so forth.

You give me much to think about because I am guilty of lumping all Evangelicals together and there obviously is a strong strain of rationalism in theological circles that is being ignored or not published. I wish those leaders would step up to counter the loudness of "the core group" who are making Sarah Palin a superstar. I'm going to read more about leaders who are trying to bridge the gap, as you say. I want to understand what is guiding Christian thought because as a Jew I am totally bewildered by the message from Republicans and feel very marginalized.

Mr. Anderson's entire column is a waste because Gov. Palin never said what he assumes she said.

Poetic justice

"Palin Country"

by John Allemang.

Please call us rednecks, 'cause we're proud
to be so rude and rough and loud,
And act in ways elitists think
Proves that we've had too much to drink
In some dead-end Alaskan dive
When ,dude, it just shows we're alive.
We love our church, our kids, our beer;
Can tell you right down to the year
That God put Man upon the earth,
Know life starts well ahead of birth,
Don't give a damn about the arts,
And stay away from foreign parts
Until the moment that we're sent
As John McCain's vice-president.

The great thing, when your neck is red?
Nobody cares what's in your head.
The voters seem to like them dumb,
So why not pick a hockey mum
Who hunts and prays and procreates
To govern these United States?
If you can drive a snowmobile,
The people, bless them, think you're real.
And in the end, who needs a brain?
Just tell your kids they must abstain,
Pretend that when your rule's ignored
It's some great gift sent by the Lord,
And proves you'll go to any length
to make each redneck fault a strength.

From The Globe And Mail. Canada. Sep 6.2008

"We know that Sarah Palin made efforts to ban books in her local library. One might call this an excellent example of unreflective religious ideology pushing critical thought aside."

Which books did she make "efforts to ban"? What kinds of efforts? There are a lot of hateful, pornographic, racist, misogynous books out there that should be banned from the children's sections of libraries, and some that are not worthy of public funding for the adult sections either.

Specifics matter. The rest is echo chamber.

James:

"Unlike Governor Palin, I do not believe that our nation's leaders have sent our sons on "a task that is from God.""

You are really quoting Sally Quinn misquoting Governor Palin.

Dean, you said, "We are here to be tested to see if we will follow God's commandments (rewarded if we do and damned if we don't)"

Have you kept the Ten Commandments?

Mr. Anderson,

Because a person inquires about banning books does not mean "we know that [she] made efforts to ban books...

I don't want my local library to allow those under 18 to view pornography on the Internet in the library. I was told, in so many words, to shut up, go away, we will fight this to the death.

Also,
Extreme intellectualizing and extreme evangelizing, to me, are equally wrong but for different reasons. The Bible teaches eternal truths. Our responsibility is to apply those truths to our own lives and to INVITE others to come unto Christ.

The two extreme positions, in practice, are far from what I read that Christ did when he walked the earth.

Finally,
I agree that God does not "interfere with... the nature of human freedom." We are here to be tested to see if we will follow God's commandments (rewarded if we do and damned if we don't). Any interference with that "test" is against God's plan.

I also agree that Mrs. Palin needs to be mentored, if needed, that we do not impose our religious values on others unless that religious value is exactly the same as a needed social value. E.g., love your neighbor, help those in need, don't steal, kill, etc.